That sounds pretty quirky, and I like quirky. I've been thinking back to when we were talking about making different kinds of games with OMW (I think you suggested a platformer at some point), rather than TES-likes, and eventually I'd like to see an ES that shows these various different kinds of games, which is kind of what I was trying to get at with the vignettes in my last post. I think that would ultimately be the most effective showcase of the engine because it would show that it can do a lot more than just copy Morrowind's gameplay.

What if the player is not exactly crazy in the typical sense, but just experiencing other people's dreams/memories, and this gets you sent to an institution for treatment of your delusional psychosis? Maybe when you meet another patient who used to be a parkour racer, you play a racing platformer, and when you meet an unhinged LARPer, you play a dungeon crawl, etc. Maybe at some point, since you're surrounded by a variety of mentally ill people, their thoughts intrude more and more, and the line between reality and delusion gets blurry. Yes, I know this sounds a bit like Psychonauts, but I think there's plenty of room to make it our own. The main drawback here is that it could end up requiring a lot of assets and scripting, but we can also make use of a variety of assets already available -- find a random model that looks good, and we can find some way to use it.

johndh wrote:Maybe when you meet another patient who used to be a parkour racer, you play a racing platformer

But OpenMW is not a parkour racing platformer engine. It´s a first person open world RPG engine. Even if you somehow bypass the technical impossibilities of making parkour possible solely via scripts on OpenMW-CS, it´s going to feel extremely awkward. We should demo it for what it is in my opinion and forget strange minigames that don´t fit into OpenMW´s purpose.

DestinedToDie wrote:
But OpenMW is not a racing platformer engine. It´s a first person open world RPG engine. We should demo it for what it is in my opinion and forget strange minigames that don´t fit into OpenMW´s capabilities.

You've already got running and jumping. All you'd have to do is a little(?) scripting to add the timing element. I'm not saying that we should incorporate a fishing simulator or grand strategy game, just minor but interesting variations on what is obviously possible. If you take a game like Morrowind and change the camera angle and control scheme, you've basically got a Diablo clone. If the point is to show that OMW can play Morrowind and games almost exactly like Morrowind, then I'm not sure why the ES is even necessary. What's there to show off other than a Morrowind gameplay video with some modded textures and water shaders?

johndh wrote: If you take a game like Morrowind and change the camera angle and control scheme, you've basically got a Diablo clone.

To change the camera behavior to that of a Diablo clone you need to change the source code. The same with proper parkour platformer. This is out of scope for the ES. We are not doing an engine rewrite. We are doing an engine demo.

It´s not out of question that the engine will take an approach that would support top down camera needed for a Diablo clone. And if it does, then it will be in the ES. But if it doesn´t, ES project won´t go out of its way to implement it in the engine. I consider OpenMW- and OpenMW-ES 2 different projects. When you suggest something about OpenMW on the ES, then... well, I think we´re really the wrong people to implement your suggestion.

johndh wrote:If the point is to show that OMW can play Morrowind and games almost exactly like Morrowind, then I'm not sure why the ES is even necessary. What's there to show off other than a Morrowind gameplay video with some modded textures and water shaders?

You´re kind of right here. A lot of people don´t care about the ES in its current state, even more haven´t even heard about it. Only a few are interested. We discussed why those people are interested in this thread.

For those who care and for those who are willing to put money on it, I´m willing to work on it. That´s pretty much the point of making the ES 0.13 thread for me. But if you suggest that I do a parkouring platformer... that´s beyond my capabilities (I don´t know C++), as well as the engine capabilities right now. I don´t think we can realistically deliver such a thing, from the ES side at least.

DestinedToDie wrote:
To change the camera behavior to that of a Diablo clone you need to change the source code. The same with proper parkour platformer.

I have it on good authority that the camera is controlled by the "Camera" object. Unless I'm missing something, repositioning the camera would take a few seconds in Blender (including the time it takes to export) and that's all. As far as a platformer, I'm not suggesting Mirror's Edge or Overgrowth here. Run, jump, crouch, cross the finish line, pick up some tokens along the way, etc. These are all things that you normally do in Morrowind already. Anyway, the specifics of the suggestions are largely irrelevant to the point that showing we can run Morrowind and games almost exactly like it, doesn't sound as worthwhile as showing that the engine can do a lot more with very little extra effort and just a modicum of creativity. I'm not telling you not to do the thing, but I think you're missing an opportunity here.

I consider OpenMW- and OpenMW-ES 2 different projects.

Me too, because they are. That's why I'm not suggesting any new features.

Of your four goals, the first three require little more than the rock simulator you mentioned -- one NPC, one room, one outdoor area, one quest, one fight, one spell, etc., which is what I initially thought the ES was going to be before the castles, islands, and Lovecraftian conspiracies showed up -- so if that's the crux of it then I don't know why we're not just doing that. If the extra stuff is just in service to #4, then I think that goal would be better served by a different project, specifically an art jam.

johndh wrote:
To change the camera behavior to that of a Diablo clone you need to change the source code. The same with proper parkour platformer.

Diablo clone camera is "locked". However in OpenMW you can use the mouse to look around. If all you do is simply reposition the camera, you still don´t get a diablo clone camera. You need changes in the source code.

johndh wrote:Run, jump, crouch

What crouch? Do you think that going into sneak mode works as crouching? Your collision box is still going to be same. You can´t sneak under stuff unless you can already walk under it. In OpenMW you can run and jump, but that´s it. The little extra that you´re talking about requires engine changes.

And when you make a parkouring session in an engine that´s not even designed around being a parkour racing engine, it´s going to look awkward as ever. It´ll look pretty bad and half-assed, actually. A parkouring session where you can only run and jump. That´s not even parkour.

Why do we want to demo parkour racing on the OpenMW demo when the engine wasn´t made with that in mind and no sane game developer is going to look at OpenMW and think "hey, this engine is perfect for that parkour game I´ve been wanting to make!" ? I would leave parkouring for engines that are made for it and can pull it off as a smooth experience.

I don´t think we´ll agree on this topic, so how about this? I´ll give you the green light. You can make a parkouring race as part of the ES and we´ll include it in there. Now if I´m wrong in my opinion, we´ll have an awesome parkouring session. If I´m right, then we´ll have an example to point at whenever someone comes forward with an idea that just doesn´t work in the engine.

You know I never actually said it was supposed to be a parkour game, right? I said racing platformer, and then when you misunderstood what I meant, I clarified that I'm not talking about an actual parkour simulation but rather a very simple platformer, but somehow you're still going with "totally a parkour game" for some reason. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not deliberately missing the point.

DestinedToDie wrote:
You need changes in the source code.

You seem awfully confident in what the source code allows and doesn't allow, for someone who admits to not knowing any programming. Have you tried making any changes to the camera? If not, I don't see what basis you have for your confidence. Besides, there are three camera modes: a first-person "free look" mode, a third person locked camera, and a vanity camera. Regardless, this is a tangential nit-pick that doesn't really undermine the core point that making a Morrowind knock-off doesn't do much to show in any impressive way what can be made with the engine.

Your collision box is still going to be same.

The collision box is whatever we make it, no?

I´ll give you the green light.

I don't recall asking your permission, but given your apparent vision for this project thus far, I don't think I'm interested. I hope it all goes well for you.

johndh wrote:You know I never actually said it was supposed to be a parkour game, right? I said racing platformer, and then when you misunderstood what I meant, I clarified that I'm not talking about an actual parkour simulation but rather a very simple platformer, but somehow you're still going with "totally a parkour game" for some reason. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not deliberately missing the point.

DestinedToDie wrote:
You need changes in the source code.

You seem awfully confident in what the source code allows and doesn't allow, for someone who admits to not knowing any programming. Have you tried making any changes to the camera? If not, I don't see what basis you have for your confidence. Besides, there are three camera modes: a first-person "free look" mode, a third person locked camera, and a vanity camera. Regardless, this is a tangential nit-pick that doesn't really undermine the core point that making a Morrowind knock-off doesn't do much to show in any impressive way what can be made with the engine.

Your collision box is still going to be same.

The collision box is whatever we make it, no?

I´ll give you the green light.

I don't recall asking your permission, but given your apparent vision for this project thus far, I don't think I'm interested. I hope it all goes well for you.

Hey, JohnDH, I find it funny you complain about the progress of the ES while you didn't do anything to help for a while. Everyone has ideas man, but if we find your idea shit, we won't help you on realising, alright?

And also, I would like to ask everyone to stop complaining about the "genericity" of the ES. The point is to showcase, mostly, graphical capabilities. and what is possible to do with a little effort, without touching the base code of the engine. . Such as, and not limited to: Quests, Environments, bad dialogue, good dialogue, shitty scripts... And the likes. The ES however needs to stick to a theme, which is both generic, and non divisive. I won't work on a platformer, and a platformer is not an rpg. And most people working on the ES also think so. The peeps behind the ES mostly want to be working on... An RPG! (DUN DUN DUUUUUUN)

And the medieval theme, unfortunately, is the most generic, and well versed theme for such an example game. It isn't divisive, or not a lot, and it works very well to showcase RPG capabilities.

So hey, want to make a diablo clone with the Example Suite? Go on, do it yourself man. Fork it for I'm not doing anything to help you. Want to make a platformer with the Example Suite? Same thing, for I am not doing anything to help you.

Sorry if I sounded bitter, but 3 changes of theme in less than a month is too much. Destined2Die, please stick with the medieval theme, because it works, and it is most inclusive to RPG fans. Contrarily to the other styles of rpg proposed so far. And the non rpgs.

EDIT: If we are to continue developping that software, we might as well have monthly google hangouts, as a way to inform each others of the development made and of encouraging developpers to stay within the team. Just a proposition, but it might just work.

I thought the discussion was just that and hasn't become anything actionable. We're just talking/typing so no reason to be discouraged if 'visions' of the ES are different.

I see the point that people are interested in working on the ES because it furthers their end-goals in another area. I'm OK with this up to a point.

We launched the ES on an Island because we had ready-made terrain that looks somewhat realistic. We are building off of that and moving forward as best we can in trying to accommodate everyone's great ideas. I think we've reached a point that we need to start pushing back however. We can't keep making ES into a full game nor can't we pull it into a direction that distracts from it being an 'Example Suite'.

If you want to show off OpenMW as a Diablo clone, awesome, fork ES and go do that. You can re-use everything in the ES and what people in the future add to the ES, just as the ES can also use what you plan on doing in the Diablo clone. Having parallel projects are OK! I see a lot of overlap and people interested in the Diablo clone can work on that and it would still benefit the ES.

We still have our core, which is 'The Island" and collecting parts of our journal. Where that takes us on the Island is left up to those wanting to work on the ES.

We can even go so far as to accommodate people's wishes in that we show off different parts of an Island in different ways, that is also possible. Medieval World, West World, Post-Apoc World, Dungeon Crawler World... you get the idea. This makes the ES even more flexible since we aren't really telling a story.